I thought I'd make a separate thread on this considering it has been a topic of conversation throughout the week. I know you all were watching how they performed in this game, as I was. With all of the hype Luck has been given throughout the draft and throughout his career, and all the ball-licking commentary praising Luck that was going on throughout the broadcast, it is clear that Luck is more highly regarded across the country than Russell Wilson. But, by any statistical measure, including total wins, completion percentage, TDs, total TDs, and QBR, Russell Wilson is clearly the superior QB.

However, Luck got the one statistic that truly mattered yesterday, when he and the Colts beat the Wilson-led Seahawks. While Luck played great, I sense from a lot of .netters that they are buying into the hype that Luck is a superior QB. If you just focus on the fact that Luck won, he played better. However, having saw the game, it was clear to me that Wilson actually played better on the field, and if not for a few costly penalties and a drop by a wide-open Lynch, we would have won. Lets look at the stats:

Luck did great. He made 3 or 4 plays out of nothing and made good throws. However, Wilson made about ten plays from nothing and never settled down to throw because of the oline. If any other QB played for us in that game he gets sacked 6-10 times.

aawolf wrote:I thought I'd make a separate thread on this considering it has been a topic of conversation throughout the week. I know you all were watching how they performed in this game, as I was. With all of the hype Luck has been given throughout the draft and throughout his career, and all the ball-licking commentary praising Luck that was going on throughout the broadcast, it is clear that Luck is more highly regarded across the country than Russell Wilson. But, by any statistical measure, including total wins, completion percentage, TDs, total TDs, and QBR, Russell Wilson is clearly the superior QB.

However, Luck got the one statistic that truly mattered yesterday, when he and the Colts beat the Wilson-led Seahawks. While Luck played great, I sense from a lot of .netters that they are buying into the hype that Luck is a superior QB. If you just focus on the fact that Luck won, he played better. However, having saw the game, it was clear to me that Wilson actually played better on the field, and if not for a few costly penalties and a drop by a wide-open Lynch, we would have won. Lets look at the stats:

Russell Wilson was responsible for 5 LESS YARDS THAN THE ENTIRE COLTS OFFENSE!

Luck threw a perfect TD pass to Hilton in beating Browner. Wilson overthrew a wide open Golden Tate who also would've scored.

One was a completion, and one was an incompletion in the box score, but that would swing the game. If Wilson connects with Tate, and Luck overthrows Hilton, this game is ours. You can't spout raw stats and have it tell you the story of a game.

Luck had a few balls dropped on him early. He made some really good passes throughout the game. I thought he was very, vey good. I thought Wilson was off target a few times. It would be interesting to see though, how Luck would have done in a Seahawks jersey with Colts coming at him almost right away when he was trying to survey the field. I think you would have been looking at sack city and probably pics. I really want to watch Russell in a future game with decent, not even great, protection, to see how he does. Maybe in a game where we can then compare him to the opposing quarterback like Brees or somebody good.I will give the nod to Luck for yesterdays quarterbacking mainly because of their success relative to ours on third down. Maybe that fault lies mainly beyond RW. That's a question to be considered I guess.

BTW, Luck got his yards against a far superior defense than Wilson was facing. At least that is what I read here all last week. Luck had never seen a defense like he would be facing yesterday. He also had little in the way of a running game to help him out whereas Wilson had a RB in the backfield with him that would run for 100 yards also.

Listen, Wilson is a very tough, good QB. I don't know why so many here are so hell-bent about trying to prove he's better than Luck. The only question you should be worried about is if he's good enough to win a Super Bowl with Seattle. If he is, who cares about what anyone else thinks about him? If you want to claim that Wilson is better based on a few select stats every time they face off and Luck continues to win the game (in spite of having an inferior team surrounding him like yesterday) then I guess I'd be fine with that.

LotsOfLuck wrote:BTW, Luck got his yards against a far superior defense than Wilson was facing. At least that is what I read here all last week. Luck had never seen a defense like he would be facing yesterday. He also had little in the way of a running game to help him out whereas Wilson had a RB in the backfield with him that would run for 100 yards also.

Listen, Wilson is a very tough, good QB. I don't know why so many here are so hell-bent about trying to prove he's better than Luck. The only question you should be worried about is if he's good enough to win a Super Bowl with Seattle. If he is, who cares about what anyone else thinks about him? If you want to claim that Wilson is better based on a few select stats every time they face off and Luck continues to win the game (in spite of having an inferior team surrounding him like yesterday) then I guess I'd be fine with that.

I feel like people are trying to breed a hatred here between us and the colts. And Colts fans, would you be here if you had lost yesterday? I appreciate you adding to the conversation, but when you start your post with "lol" it really makes me discredit anything you have to add to the conversation. It doesn't matter if RW is on Luck's level or not. We know we have the better team, and I wouldn't trade RW for Luck at any point. I am happy for both franchises at this point, and colts fans know you got a way with one yesterday. Good luck to you the rest of the way. I don't mean that as a pun or sarcastically either.

LotsOfLuck wrote:BTW, Luck got his yards against a far superior defense than Wilson was facing. At least that is what I read here all last week. Luck had never seen a defense like he would be facing yesterday. He also had little in the way of a running game to help him out whereas Wilson had a RB in the backfield with him that would run for 100 yards also.

Listen, Wilson is a very tough, good QB. I don't know why so many here are so hell-bent about trying to prove he's better than Luck. The only question you should be worried about is if he's good enough to win a Super Bowl with Seattle. If he is, who cares about what anyone else thinks about him? If you want to claim that Wilson is better based on a few select stats every time they face off and Luck continues to win the game (in spite of having an inferior team surrounding him like yesterday) then I guess I'd be fine with that.

capncrunch wrote:Luck had a few balls dropped on him early. He made some really good passes throughout the game. I thought he was very, vey good. I thought Wilson was off target a few times. It would be interesting to see though, how Luck would have done in a Seahawks jersey with Colts coming at him almost right away when he was trying to survey the field. I think you would have been looking at sack city and probably pics. I really want to watch Russell in a future game with decent, not even great, protection, to see how he does. Maybe in a game where we can then compare him to the opposing quarterback like Brees or somebody good.I will give the nod to Luck for yesterdays quarterbacking mainly because of their success relative to ours on third down. Maybe that fault lies mainly beyond RW. That's a question to be considered I guess.

Sorry but Luck had very minimal time to get the ball out as well so lets just put it as you guys would rather have RW and we would rather have luck

LotsOfLuck wrote:Listen, Wilson is a very tough, good QB. I don't know why so many here are so hell-bent about trying to prove he's better than Luck. The only question you should be worried about is if he's good enough to win a Super Bowl with Seattle. If he is, who cares about what anyone else thinks about him?

Agreed 100%. Luck is a great QB. Wilson is a great QB. Who cares who is better than who. If my team's QB can get us to the promised land, that's all I care about.

LotsOfLuck wrote:BTW, Luck got his yards against a far superior defense than Wilson was facing.

That's cool. Wilson was only playing without his starting LT, RT, C, and TE, but I guess that doesn't matter. None of his receivers are on Reggie Wayne's level either. He was also playing on the road. But yeah, just ignore all that and manipulate the narrative how you want.

LotsOfLuck wrote:BTW, Luck got his yards against a far superior defense than Wilson was facing.

That's cool. Wilson was only playing without his starting LT, RT, C, and TE, but I guess that doesn't matter. None of his receivers are on Reggie Wayne's level either. He was also playing on the road. But yeah, just ignore all that and manipulate the narrative how you want.

And Luck was without his starting TE (Allen) and working with his 3rd starting RB (Ballard, Bradshaw, Richardson) of the season in only the fifth game. We could sit here and do this all day.

Like I said earlier, after having gone through close to a decade of Manning/Brady talk, that's all silly debates like this come down to. People looking at selective items and pretending like it has more merit than other selective items that don't fit their agenda. But that's what ESPN has told us sports talk should look like so that how most of us engage in it anymore.

LotsofLuck, you have to understand we have no trophies up here. And, there's a perceived slight in any draft pick, article, post or game. Think short-man complex, for an entire fanbase. Screwed over in SBXL, Vinnie's helmet, etc all adds to that. With that, the "Luck's overrated" thing's been a constant theme.

Also, we've never had a franchise QB. Never. Hass was good, but he also threw behind the Great Wall of China equipped with a wicked play-caller (for his time). So, this is new for us. All of us.

LotsOfLuck wrote:Like I said earlier, after having gone through close to a decade of Manning/Brady talk, that's all silly debates like this come down to. People looking at selective items and pretending like it has more merit than other selective items that don't fit their agenda. But that's what ESPN has told us sports talk should look like so that how most of us engage in it anymore.

This exactly. Both great Qb's and I would say their definitely the top 2 of the younger QB generation. Wouldn't trade our QB for theirs and I'm sure they wouldn't trade theirs for ours. I know he's underrated athletically, but I feel like Luck would die behind our oline, well most Qb's would probably too though. People are just goona nit pick their items to support their agenda. Hard to say who's better because although they have certain aspects that one is better than the other, it's all pretty close and I don't think one is clearly by far better than the other.

For anyone to say that our Oline is better is a pure joke, Last year luck got no protection at all and lead us to the playoffs so saying he would die behind your oline is purely irrational. I am not discounting RW's abilities he's a good qb but saying luck isn't and you wouldn't at least be TEMPTED to take him over RW is not realistic

coltsfan1405 wrote:lol im sorry but Wilson is not on lucks level VERY close but just not yet I hope we see you guys in the superbowl cause it will be a very good game and on neutral grounds in NY

Depends on what you mean by "level," as both players bring something different to the position.

Don't get me wrong, I think Luck is the best QB to come out of college since Elway. But he doesn't have the allusiveness of Wilson. Luck is very fast north and south for a QB, but as far as scrambling for 15 yards and giving opposing defenses nightmares with BOTH his arms and legs? I give the edge to Wilson.

Overall accuracy I give the edge to Luck though. The dude throws dimes.

Well it's all very subjective, not completely irrational. Would I take Luck over Wilson, maybe. I don't know if he'll be better, but if he is, I would definitely love to have him, but I just don't know if he'll be better. Would I be tempted to try a switch to see though? Definitely.

coltsfan1405 wrote:lol im sorry but Wilson is not on lucks level VERY close but just not yet I hope we see you guys in the superbowl cause it will be a very good game and on neutral grounds in NY

Depends on what you mean by "level," as both players bring something different to the position.

Don't get me wrong, I think Luck is the best QB to come out of college since Elway. But he doesn't have the allusiveness of Wilson. Luck is very fast north and south for a QB, but as far as scrambling for 15 yards and giving opposing defenses nightmares with BOTH his arms and legs? I give the edge to Wilson.

Overall accuracy I give the edge to Luck though. The dude throws dimes.

That's all im saying don't say you would never take luck cause that's irrational someday I may be saying I wish we took RW who knows but to say right now that Luck is outright worse than RW is not rational

Luck is definitely not worse, but I would also say Wilson is definitely not worse either. Both have different circumstances and obstacles to over come. Really hard to judge each of them objectively. Obviously his point wasn't to diss the team, but we're also not goona act like our oline is good right now. It's missing 2 pro bowlers and our starting RT, so it's definitely not goona look the same with patchwork lineman. You can the context for however you please.

Andrew Luck is as good as advertised. in 2-3 years he will be the best QB among his generation, having Aaron Rodgers type of upside.

Russell Wilson is FAR greater than advertised and should have been a top 15 draft pick. Lucky us ! Other than that, he is probably a top 10 QB caliber of a player, and sort of reminds me on Cam Newton.

I still don't see why you think I am irrational if I don't want Luck over Wilson. Or am I misunderstanding? Literally, no part of me wants Luck over Wilson. None. Zero. Nada. Does that mean I think Wilson is better or that I hate Luck? I don't think so. I am happy with our QB, and it has to do with more than QB play on the field. I think Luck leaves Indy at some point in his career. Maybe Wilson leaves eventually too, but I think we have a better chance of having RW forever than Indy has of keeping Luck forever. I have no evidence to back that claim, mind you, none. I'm just happy with our guy. Call me crazy.

No no no in no way am I calling you irrational for loving your QB you would be if you didn't im just saying that you would be irrational for saying you wouldn't be happy with having luck also. And we kept manning for that long we can keep luck for that long as well

aawolf wrote:I thought I'd make a separate thread on this considering it has been a topic of conversation throughout the week. I know you all were watching how they performed in this game, as I was. With all of the hype Luck has been given throughout the draft and throughout his career, and all the ball-licking commentary praising Luck that was going on throughout the broadcast, it is clear that Luck is more highly regarded across the country than Russell Wilson. But, by any statistical measure, including total wins, completion percentage, TDs, total TDs, and QBR, Russell Wilson is clearly the superior QB.

However, Luck got the one statistic that truly mattered yesterday, when he and the Colts beat the Wilson-led Seahawks. While Luck played great, I sense from a lot of .netters that they are buying into the hype that Luck is a superior QB. If you just focus on the fact that Luck won, he played better. However, having saw the game, it was clear to me that Wilson actually played better on the field, and if not for a few costly penalties and a drop by a wide-open Lynch, we would have won. Lets look at the stats:

A lot of the pushback against Luck is due to the overexposure in the media and the constant refrain of him being "the" prototype. This leads to reporting that washes over mistakes and defers questionable play to the fault of his teammates.

Is a great young QB? Yup.Does he have a bright future? Yup.Expect he'll be top 5 soon and hang out there for a long time.

No need to fluff things to the extreme. It'll be interesting watching these two as the years go by. Luck has worked hard and seems to put in the effort to maximize his skills. And yet, he's always been handed the keys to the car. Top 5 QB coming out of High School. Next step, starting at Stanford. Then picked first and handed his job at the Colts. Nothing wrong with that, but he's never had to fight for the position.

In Russell's case he's always had to fight for his position, regardless how well he's played. Meaning his mindset must be somewhat linked to the idea that he HAS to improve or everything will be taken away. Has Luck ever had to worry about the repercussions from having a bad game? As competitive as Luck may be, I have to give Russ the edge in this area (drive to get better). It's similar to what Rodgers had to go through to get to GB (fight or fail).

If we didn't have Wilson, I'd take Luck in a heartbeat, no doubt. Who wouldn't? He'll be great for years to come. That said, I'll keep Wilson, you keep Luck. It's apples and oranges in my mind. I like what we have in Wilson for our offense.

KARAVARUS wrote:I still don't see why you think I am irrational if I don't want Luck over Wilson. Or am I misunderstanding? Literally, no part of me wants Luck over Wilson. None. Zero. Nada. Does that mean I think Wilson is better or that I hate Luck? I don't think so. I am happy with our QB, and it has to do with more than QB play on the field. I think Luck leaves Indy at some point in his career. Maybe Wilson leaves eventually too, but I think we have a better chance of having RW forever than Indy has of keeping Luck forever. I have no evidence to back that claim, mind you, none. I'm just happy with our guy. Call me crazy.

You are crazy.

If you polled every GM and coach in the league (other than Seattle's), they'd take Luck over Wilson........and you would too if you removed your allegiance to the Hawks.

I love Russell, he's a top 10 QB in this league and a fantastic teammate, role model and community leader. But Luck is an every 25 year type of QB. IMO he's that special.

Reggie Wayne has said luck is one of the most intense players he's ever played with and like you know he's played with peyton manning lol says he is never happy with his game even in games where he does amazing always striving to be better which im sure Wilson does as well but to say luck doesn't have the drive to be better is nonsense sorry

coltsfan1405 wrote:Reggie Wayne has said luck is one of the most intense players he's ever played with and like you know he's played with peyton manning lol says he is never happy with his game even in games where he does amazing always striving to be better which im sure Wilson does as well but to say luck doesn't have the drive to be better is nonsense sorry

Don't think anyone is saying he doesn't have the drive to be better. Just things my be a bit relative when compared to someone who always had to compete regardless of how well they performed (always doubted).

KARAVARUS wrote:I still don't see why you think I am irrational if I don't want Luck over Wilson. Or am I misunderstanding? Literally, no part of me wants Luck over Wilson. None. Zero. Nada. Does that mean I think Wilson is better or that I hate Luck? I don't think so. I am happy with our QB, and it has to do with more than QB play on the field. I think Luck leaves Indy at some point in his career. Maybe Wilson leaves eventually too, but I think we have a better chance of having RW forever than Indy has of keeping Luck forever. I have no evidence to back that claim, mind you, none. I'm just happy with our guy. Call me crazy.

You are crazy.

If you polled every GM and coach in the league (other than Seattle's), they'd take Luck over Wilson........and you would too if you removed your allegiance to the Hawks.

I love Russell, he's a top 10 QB in this league and a fantastic teammate, role model and community leader. But Luck is an every 25 year type of QB. IMO he's that special.

So be it. I full on admitted it goes beyond QB play for me. I like the guy as a person and a good sam. It just so happens, I think he will get his Super Bowls more frequently, and before Luck. I am no GM and to be honest with you; Wilson is a player I would love regardless of the team he was on. Unlike a Richard Sherman, whom I would absolutely hate if he was on any other team. Keep your every 25 year player and I'll roll the dice that we have a once in a lifetime player. Maybe not, but the jury is still out.

coltsfan1405 wrote:Reggie Wayne has said luck is one of the most intense players he's ever played with and like you know he's played with peyton manning lol says he is never happy with his game even in games where he does amazing always striving to be better which im sure Wilson does as well but to say luck doesn't have the drive to be better is nonsense sorry

I love how you say "sorry" after everything that is said. You are taking things too literally here. No one imagines that Luck doesn't do everything he can to improve. The truth is, you really don't even need to defend him. Nearly everyone on the planet is gushing over him. I think he's good, but don't feel others should be offended that not EVERYONE would bend over their own grandma to have him on their team. I might be in the minority, but that's the way it is. I'm okay with it.

KARAVARUS wrote:I still don't see why you think I am irrational if I don't want Luck over Wilson. Or am I misunderstanding? Literally, no part of me wants Luck over Wilson. None. Zero. Nada. Does that mean I think Wilson is better or that I hate Luck? I don't think so. I am happy with our QB, and it has to do with more than QB play on the field. I think Luck leaves Indy at some point in his career. Maybe Wilson leaves eventually too, but I think we have a better chance of having RW forever than Indy has of keeping Luck forever. I have no evidence to back that claim, mind you, none. I'm just happy with our guy. Call me crazy.

You are crazy.

If you polled every GM and coach in the league (other than Seattle's), they'd take Luck over Wilson........

And candidly, our GM would take Luck in a heartbeat. That won't be a popular statement but it's the truth.